Jude Law as Superman and Colin Farrell as Batman

[dejan]

Feb 13, 2021 17:15:59 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

Feb 13, 2021 13:03:30 GMT -5 dejan said:

Fair points as always cam.

Reeve was correct about one thing after the release of SIII.........that the franchise had run it's course.....there was nothing left to do in cinematic terms(sure as a template, the comics offered infinite possibilities /stories to tell....but they did not  always translate well to the big screen).
And whilst SIII did not achieve the heights of I & II(either in corporate or artistic terms) it was still a piece of unique cinematic entertainment within the context of 1983(or the late 70s/early 80s).

As an intriguing hypothesis:
If there had been a fan insurrection in the mid 80s(as opposed to the early - mid 2000s).......a Donner cut could have been forged at that point(circa 1985-86-87)!---between LadyHawke and Lethal Weapon.
Just imagine that in the mid 80s......Donner's SII footage would have been easier to salvage seeing as it would have been  relatively closer to the time period where it had been archived(late 70s).
By allowing another 20 years to go by(i.e 2005).....I am sure some of  that SII footage just got lost/dumped.

But in the mid 80s key actors and production staff were still around to theoretically contribute additional/ new footage!
Just imagine Brando ,Hackman, Reeve and Kidder coming back circa 1985-86 to film the scenes they never got to complete in that original 77-78 shoot!

And whilst the actors had aged(by 1986) since that original shooting schedule(77-78)......I would much rather have had those continuity anomalies that would have perforated a hypothetical mid 80s Donner SII cut......than was the travesty that ended up being SIV!

Hmmm.....maybe that is worth a thread of it's own............a hypothetical 1986/87 SII Donner cut(with a full budget and returning actors to boot!).

mmmm.... again, I appreciate the respectful debate.... but if anything the MCU has proven is that there's a TON of comic book material- if handled properly, can make for endless films, crossovers, and spinoffs- but quality control being the key!

(As a great example- the Alien & Terminator franchises versus Marvel's cinematic and now Feige-controlled tv universe)

I will say, though, that for GREAT story arcs/whatnot, I think there were a limited amount of Superman-centric stories that were big budget-worthy in the comics on its own (introducing Supergirl, Brainiac, the Legion, etc.)--- but I saw maybe 7 or 8 films.... not 2 or 3 and done!

If- however- DC had exerted control that everything had to remain the status quo by the end of each movie, then I think it might have been trickier if there was going to be too much micromanagement creatively at that time- to continue the series.

BUT- if WB/DC were 'hands off, do whatever you want'- it would have been fascinating if Donner and Mank had taken up WB's offer to jump back on board and try to right the ship--- but just like Lois having to have a memory wipe of moments here and there, the audience would have to be (and we have been) forgiving of the time-reversal power, the memory kiss power, etc. to go along for the ride as I thought it was a bit of a compromised franchise from the moment of the time reversal creatively...

But- no franchise is perfect. Singer returning to X-men showed just how a franchise could have missteps and still be saved.... (Though at this point, even if Marvel didn't have X-men back, it's hard to see how X-men could return to greatness after Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix...)

With regard to a 'what if' Donner and company came back to do a special edition back in the 80's.... ABSOLUTELY it would have been cool- even if the actors would have been visibly much older, I would have been more than fine with at least them trying to get it fixed the way it should have.

Absolutely agree that the comics offered a variety of different templates that could have been adapted for the big screen.
The major factors from my point of view where:

1)The technology available to realize those templates.

2)The willingness of Reeve to partake in those kinds of projects.

You made an an excellent point about the MCU.
But the MCU was only possible because of the prominence of digital workflows in contemporary filmmaking(although this is an oxymoron as sometimes film is no longer even used!!).....literally from capture to projection.
A hypothetical Kevin Fiege of the 1970s/1980s would have had a hard time physically realizing anything remotely close to 22 films in 12 years!
It took STM and SII almost 4 years(1976-1980).If you include SIII then that 6-7 years for 3 films!.
And that is no accident.
The original Star Wars trilogy reinforces that argument---3 incredibly complex films in 6 years(3 years between each one).
Photochemical work flows were much more intricate and cumbersome than the digital equivalents of today.
This fact is proven by the what Zac Snyder is doing now with his JL version.
He is effectively creating an entirely new film from scratch in post production(of course a nice budget helps!).
As we saw with the donner cut , photochemical work flows are not conducive to the same kind of post production tinkering.
The irony is that Donner shot more live footage(that is my supposition) for SII than Snyder has for JL!

So could we have got more Supes movies purely from a technical standpoint---absolutely---but it would have required Herculian efforts---especially to realize them with any degree of integrity. SIV is testimony to that fact.

The other problem was Reeve himself.
He changed his mind several times with regards to his Superman ambitions.
There are several interviews in both print and TV(1981-83), where he was quite definitive in his judgement.....saying that he was done once SIII would be /was completed.
 
After SIV he said he was as good as done......unless people put some effort into it!:
  


The MCU did in 12 years what took James Bond 44 years!
So had there been the equivalent of digital workflows in the 70s/80s.....we could have got more Reeve Supes films....no question.

Personally, I would rather watch Supes thwart Lex Luther's San Andreas Fault "analogue!" scheme.......than take on Brainiac in a CG poop fest!

[crazy_asian_man]

Feb 17, 2021 11:25:47 GMT -5 dejan said:

Feb 13, 2021 17:15:59 GMT -5 crazy_asian_man said:

mmmm.... again, I appreciate the respectful debate.... but if anything the MCU has proven is that there's a TON of comic book material- if handled properly, can make for endless films, crossovers, and spinoffs- but quality control being the key!

(As a great example- the Alien & Terminator franchises versus Marvel's cinematic and now Feige-controlled tv universe)

I will say, though, that for GREAT story arcs/whatnot, I think there were a limited amount of Superman-centric stories that were big budget-worthy in the comics on its own (introducing Supergirl, Brainiac, the Legion, etc.)--- but I saw maybe 7 or 8 films.... not 2 or 3 and done!

If- however- DC had exerted control that everything had to remain the status quo by the end of each movie, then I think it might have been trickier if there was going to be too much micromanagement creatively at that time- to continue the series.

BUT- if WB/DC were 'hands off, do whatever you want'- it would have been fascinating if Donner and Mank had taken up WB's offer to jump back on board and try to right the ship--- but just like Lois having to have a memory wipe of moments here and there, the audience would have to be (and we have been) forgiving of the time-reversal power, the memory kiss power, etc. to go along for the ride as I thought it was a bit of a compromised franchise from the moment of the time reversal creatively...

But- no franchise is perfect. Singer returning to X-men showed just how a franchise could have missteps and still be saved.... (Though at this point, even if Marvel didn't have X-men back, it's hard to see how X-men could return to greatness after Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix...)

With regard to a 'what if' Donner and company came back to do a special edition back in the 80's.... ABSOLUTELY it would have been cool- even if the actors would have been visibly much older, I would have been more than fine with at least them trying to get it fixed the way it should have.

Absolutely agree that the comics offered a variety of different templates that could have been adapted for the big screen.
The major factors from my point of view where:

1)The technology available to realize those templates.

2)The willingness of Reeve to partake in those kinds of projects.

You made an an excellent point about the MCU.
But the MCU was only possible because of the prominence of digital workflows in contemporary filmmaking(although this is an oxymoron as sometimes film is no longer even used!!).....literally from capture to projection.
A hypothetical Kevin Fiege of the 1970s/1980s would have had a hard time physically realizing anything remotely close to 22 films in 12 years!
It took STM and SII almost 4 years(1976-1980).If you include SIII then that 6-7 years for 3 films!.
And that is no accident.
The original Star Wars trilogy reinforces that argument---3 incredibly complex films in 6 years(3 years between each one).
Photochemical work flows were much more intricate and cumbersome than the digital equivalents of today.
This fact is proven by the what Zac Snyder is doing now with his JL version.
He is effectively creating an entirely new film from scratch in post production(of course a nice budget helps!).
As we saw with the donner cut , photochemical work flows are not conducive to the same kind of post production tinkering.
The irony is that Donner shot more live footage(that is my supposition) for SII than Snyder has for JL!

So could we have got more Supes movies purely from a technical standpoint---absolutely---but it would have required Herculian efforts---especially to realize them with any degree of integrity. SIV is testimony to that fact.

The other problem was Reeve himself.
He changed his mind several times with regards to his Superman ambitions.
There are several interviews in both print and TV(1981-83), where he was quite definitive in his judgement.....saying that he was done once SIII would be /was completed.
 
After SIV he said he was as good as done......unless people put some effort into it!:
  


The MCU did in 12 years what took James Bond 44 years!
So had there been the equivalent of digital workflows in the 70s/80s.....we could have got more Reeve Supes films....no question.

Personally, I would rather watch Supes thwart Lex Luther's San Andreas Fault "analogue!" scheme.......than take on Brainiac in a CG poop fest!

I grew up at the time where one went with the bad special effects and didn't care and gave them a pass as long as there were solid other elements at the forefront.... so- I was okay enough with SIV as long as they weren't the SAME cardboard flying shot- I would have been okay with a Canon Superman vs. Brainiac with poor fx, if you could see the heart in it and if the story worked otherwise.

Would it have made STM money? Probably not.... but I'm curious with the lowered SIV budget, if they hadn't slashed the story to incomprehension--- if the movie would have done better - and better ENOUGH to have Reeve continue and be able to redeem the image.

If STM had a Canon budget, sure, it would not have been the same movie- but would the performances and story make it enjoyable enough to sit through? Things have been way different for awhile, but back then- I would have been fine sitting through another Canon Superman sequel if Reeve was in it, even with a two cent budget.... (Though I can get it if no one else would)

[Metallo]

Feige always always had the vision to do something like the MCU but before he simply lacked the experience and like you said the technology hadn’t caught up to the source material. Now it has. Even when you hear him talk about his reaction to watching Superman IV for the first time he’s a guy that’s always thinking ahead to the future. He didn’t dwell on the failure but as a fan he was thinking of how to fix it and move forward.

Reeve said himself in 1985 before he’d signed on to IV that it would take a certain amount of money to make him fly again. I don’t blame him for waiting to get PAID. He deserved it. No him no film and Cannon knew it. I think Reeve was just burned out by the role in general and the lower quality after III. After a couple of years away he had the same renewed interest as most actors have in his situation. We’ve seen it before and since. If the money and the quality had been right Reeve always would have come back.

[crazy_asian_man]

Feb 17, 2021 14:23:48 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Feige always always had the vision to do something like the MCU but before he simply lacked the experience and like you said the technology hadn’t caught up to the source material. Now it has. Even when you hear him talk about his reaction to watching Superman IV for the first time he’s a guy that’s always thinking ahead to the future. He didn’t dwell on the failure but as a fan he was thinking of how to fix it and move forward.

Reeve said himself in 1985 before he’d signed on to IV that it would take a certain amount of money to make him fly again. I don’t blame him for waiting to get PAID. He deserved it. No him no film and Cannon knew it. I think Reeve was just burned out by the role in general and the lower quality after III. After a couple of years away he had the same renewed interest as most actors have in his situation. We’ve seen it before and since. If the money and the quality had been right Reeve always would have come back.

I think if Donner had stayed, Reeve would have stuck around. He had faith in Richard Lester- but it did NOT seem like he was overwhelmed with the results of SIII. (A couple of newspaper articles at the time had Reeve a little upset at the producers for SIII, though it was mild and not a full criticism of certain things).... so, if he was the only real cheerleader for any future Superman movies- and he had left doing a cameo for Supergirl (Plus Ilya Salkind confessed on the SII commentary that he was distracted and didn't give SII his full attention throughout the process)... if no one else cared as much as Reeve, then it's no wonder he lost so much interest himself in the role after S3....

[dejan]

cam wrote:

I grew up at the time where one went with the bad special effects and didn't care and gave them a pass as long as there were solid other elements at the forefront.... so- I was okay enough with SIV as long as they weren't the SAME cardboard flying shot- I would have been okay with a Canon Superman vs. Brainiac with poor fx, if you could see the heart in it and if the story worked otherwise.



Would it have made STM money? Probably not.... but I'm curious with the lowered SIV budget, if they hadn't slashed the story to incomprehension--- if the movie would have done better - and better ENOUGH to have Reeve continue and be able to redeem the image.



If STM had a Canon budget, sure, it would not have been the same movie- but would the performances and story make it enjoyable enough to sit through? Things have been way different for awhile, but back then- I would have been fine sitting through another Canon Superman sequel if Reeve was in it, even with a two cent budget.... (Though I can get it if no one else would)

haha 

STM on a cannon budget.....I had never thought what that would have been like(and maybe with good reason lol!).

I saw Nick Hammond's Spiderman :The Dragon's Challenge.....




......a week or so before watching the STM-SII double bill in 1981.

I loved it. Still do.  And I would still take Spidey stuntman, Fred Waugh, scaling that building in Hong Kong:
 


.....than any of the CG drivel that featured in the Maguire,Garfield or Holland movies that we have now(but that is just me!).

The Dragon's Challenge(which was only ever released here in Europe theatrically) may subscribe to some of the points that you mention.

It is filmed, directed, acted and edited with far more flair than SIV.

So if they could have made post SIII Reeve Supes movies on par with Hammond's Spidey Dragon's Challenge....I too may have been contented.

[Metallo]

Feb 23, 2021 18:17:45 GMT -5 dejan said:

cam wrote:

I grew up at the time where one went with the bad special effects and didn't care and gave them a pass as long as there were solid other elements at the forefront.... so- I was okay enough with SIV as long as they weren't the SAME cardboard flying shot- I would have been okay with a Canon Superman vs. Brainiac with poor fx, if you could see the heart in it and if the story worked otherwise.


Would it have made STM money? Probably not.... but I'm curious with the lowered SIV budget, if they hadn't slashed the story to incomprehension--- if the movie would have done better - and better ENOUGH to have Reeve continue and be able to redeem the image.


If STM had a Canon budget, sure, it would not have been the same movie- but would the performances and story make it enjoyable enough to sit through? Things have been way different for awhile, but back then- I would have been fine sitting through another Canon Superman sequel if Reeve was in it, even with a two cent budget.... (Though I can get it if no one else would)

haha 

STM on a cannon budget.....I had never thought what that would have been like(and maybe with good reason lol!).

I saw Nick Hammond's Spiderman :The Dragon's Challenge.....



......a week or so before watching the STM-SII double bill in 1981.

I loved it. Still do.  And I would still take Spidey stuntman, Fred Waugh, scaling that building in Hong Kong:
 


.....than any of the CG drivel that featured in the Maguire,Garfield or Holland movies that we have now(but that is just me!).

The Dragon's Challenge(which was only ever released here in Europe theatrically) may subscribe to some of the points that you mention.

It is filmed, directed, acted and edited with far more flair than SIV.

So if they could have made post SIII Reeve Supes movies on par with Hammond's Spidey Dragon's Challenge....I too may have been contented.

There is something captivating about the lower budget and the practical effects of the Nicholas Hammond Spider-Man series. Things like actually seeing stunt men climb up buildings and a believable Spider-Man costume when you think about what Peter could afford have their charm.

As for the Cannon Spider-Man film? It would have made the 70s tv show look slick, high budget, and even more competent in comparison. Even when you compare the Hammond costume to the mock up Cannon used for the promo photos for their Spidey films it’s obvious which one looks better. They were nowhere near ready to do something like that and the GoGo Boys were clueless on the material.

Albert Pyun made fun B Movies but we found out what a Marvel film in the Cannon style would have liked like when the first Captain America movie was released in the early 90s.

[dejan]

Metallo

Although I  cannot find any evidence to prove it,  I firmly believe that during 1977/78 whilst filming STM, Donner had one eye on Hammond's Spidey....and the other on Bixbie's Hulk.

As both provided firm templates for the grounded realities from which their stories could unfold(whatever their other short comings). 

A nice clip that shows what could be done way back then:
goto 23:47 and watch through to 28:40

Nice combination of editing, music, acting and cinematography coming together to create a suspenseful scene(and great stunt work too!)

[Metallo]

Feb 23, 2021 21:37:52 GMT -5 dejan said:

Metallo

Although I  cannot find any evidence to prove it,  I firmly believe that during 1977/78 whilst filming STM, Donner had one eye on Hammond's Spidey....and the other on Bixbie's Hulk.

As both provided firm templates for the grounded realities from which their stories could unfold(whatever their other short comings). 

A nice clip that shows what could be done way back then:
goto 23:47 and watch through to 28:40

Nice combination of editing, music, acting and cinematography coming together to create a suspenseful scene(and great stunt work too!)

I think it was just the period of time and what was in vogue with a lot of creators. They were still in that post studio filmmaking era. A lot of serious grounded films and tv were coming out in the 70s and I think all the people involved with those projects drew from what was around them as far as the direction entertainment was going in.

Kenneth Johnson always preferred stuff that was less flamboyant and more real or at least ambiguous. If you look at Donners The Omen it’s made the same way. It wasn’t overtly supernatural it instead rode the line.

[crazy_asian_man]

Feb 23, 2021 19:02:54 GMT -5 Metallo said:

Feb 23, 2021 18:17:45 GMT -5 dejan said:

cam wrote:

haha 

STM on a cannon budget.....I had never thought what that would have been like(and maybe with good reason lol!).

I saw Nick Hammond's Spiderman :The Dragon's Challenge.....



......a week or so before watching the STM-SII double bill in 1981.

I loved it. Still do.  And I would still take Spidey stuntman, Fred Waugh, scaling that building in Hong Kong:
 


.....than any of the CG drivel that featured in the Maguire,Garfield or Holland movies that we have now(but that is just me!).

The Dragon's Challenge(which was only ever released here in Europe theatrically) may subscribe to some of the points that you mention.

It is filmed, directed, acted and edited with far more flair than SIV.

So if they could have made post SIII Reeve Supes movies on par with Hammond's Spidey Dragon's Challenge....I too may have been contented.

There is something captivating about the lower budget and the practical effects of the Nicholas Hammond Spider-Man series. Things like actually seeing stunt men climb up buildings and a believable Spider-Man costume when you think about what Peter could afford have their charm.

As for the Cannon Spider-Man film? It would have made the 70s tv show look slick, high budget, and even more competent in comparison. Even when you compare the Hammond costume to the mock up Cannon used for the promo photos for their Spidey films it’s obvious which one looks better. They were nowhere near ready to do something like that and the GoGo Boys were clueless on the material.

Albert Pyun made fun B Movies but we found out what a Marvel film in the Cannon style would have liked like when the first Captain America movie was releasedit in the early 90s.

Hmnnn.... Albert Pyun seems like a nice guy, but that Captain America movie was dreadful--- if there wasn't going to be more than 10 seconds of action, then there were ways he could have gotten a good writer to make the drama portion interesting if they were only able to have talking heads. Arguably, Raimi's Spiderman could have worked dramatically even if they had to skimp on the action.... Donner's STM as a romance was the center of the film, if STM had to have bad fx and production values.... so, I still feel that with a better director a low budget superhero film could have been/should have been much better than what we got back then with the capt. america film--- but I never saw the Spiderman one. Now, I'm curious...